It isn't a good balance of cost and performance at all and that was never the point.
I am limited to the 8v head due to the class restrictions.
When I said that it has been proven in motorsport I was referring to the fact that stroking the B230 beyond 86mm has worked well for people in rallycross/autograss etc. and to get the performance figures I want I will need to stroke beyond 86mm. I think this is what you took issue with originally...stroking beyond 86mm.
Regarding the CIS system; I want to try this purely just to see if it will work. I understand that an EFI or twin carbs may work better but since I can't see any evidence that anyone has tried tuning the CIS on an N/A B230 successful or otherwise, I am willing to try it. If it works then maybe someone else will find it useful to know if it can be done.
Hundreds of people tried to make K-jet work for years: those poor fawkers who had either group N or Group A cars that came with K-Jet....including VW Golves, Audi 4000 n.a. and turbo cars, Volvo turbos, Saab turbos...in n.a the volume of the intake runners was always THE major limitation..8v VWs, Volvos, and Saab all being strangled at approx 175 hp.
GpN and GpA mandated retention of OEM intake manifold and throttle body, but directly from the best guys doing tuning in those days, it was the runners that was the limitation..
(If you are going to have useful port velocity at "normal" Svensson driving conditions--that is very light throttle and max rpm EVER somewhere around 2600 for Volvo drivers, 3600 for saab drivers, then you will make the runners so you get the port velocity you want.. Try and cram 3 times the volume of air thru the same hole and it will stack up)
Nobody was ever happy with modding K-jet...The Swedes at the time were nice enough to send me sketches on modding specific airflow heads to make the Saab 8v things "work" but I didn't have the machining capability then...and amusingly 20 years later I got a request from one of the guys asking if i still had the old sketch because those cars were legal for Classic class, and they'd lost their notes...One guy said "We don't want to dwell on unpleasant memories"
EVERYBODY hated the fact some cars like GolfII were originally homologated with K-jet and even once the 5 year rule kicked in and the cars were no longer legal for group A, the idiots at SBF decided that even in "National" Class, (later "Grupp H") Golves had to be built to strict GpA spec...only in 1994 did sense finaly prevail and Golves could ditch the K-jet junk and intake and use normal carb or ITB and headers on the exhaust side...
the press at the time said "This will breath new life into those Golves by being competitive again"...And they still are--I believe Gp H title this year was won by a Golf guy just last week.
In short, it IS proven--30 years ago---that its a pointless annoying, frustrating exercise and never works well...and I assure you that you don't have the resources that those guys had...
I imagine if you asked ANYBODY who knows anything about making power in Sweden, they MIGHT be polite since you're doubtless speaking English with them...
I speak with them like anybody else, my Swedsih was learned in motorsport, that's why I lived there for 7-8 years..even back then it was from their side "WHY!!!??? Fawk that junk! ARE YOU INSANE?"
I explained we had introduced "Group A" as a class here..
Them "SH1T..screw that, do some other class..Its endless frustration..and you'll NEVER get the fuel slope correct..If OK on top it'll be pig-rich on midrange and sh!t on bottom"
They were right.
As for power goals..Engines make torque and for a given fuel by and large engine torque is pretty much engine volume x compression.
But the engine isn't the only place that torque is made....gearbox and final drive makes an awful lot of the toque that gets to the wheel...and moves the car..What's your plans there?